Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
In the Daily Herald Today -- Provo River June Suckers
#1
[#800080][url "http://www.harktheherald.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=19569&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0"]River flow to be raised for June sucker[/url][/#800080]
Thursday, April 22, 2004 - 12:00 AM
Caleb Warnock THE DAILY HERALD [url "http://www.harktheherald.com/print.php?sid=19569"][Image: print.gif][/url] | [url "http://www.harktheherald.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=Recommend_Us&file=index&req=FriendSend&sid=19569"][Image: friend.gif][/url]

Conservation officials will begin artificially raising the flow of the Provo River this week to help the endangered June sucker spawn.

Chris Keleher of the June Sucker Recovery Program said the artificial flows will begin almost immediately and last until about mid-June. [url "http://adserver.harktheherald.com/adclick.php?n=a4616ee2"][Image: adview.php?what=zone:27&n=a4616ee2][/url]

"We'll monitor it, and if the river flow starts to drop as irrigators turn on, we'll adjust the flow to make sure it keeps the June sucker alive with as little water as we need to send down," he said.

In the 1800s, Utah Lake was home to at least six native species of fish, he said. Today, the June sucker and the Utah sucker are the only two remaining. The June sucker occurs naturally nowhere else in the world.

Introduced species dominate Utah Lake, eating the young spawn of the June sucker and Utah sucker, Keleher said. After eight years of study, experts believe Utah Lake has only 450 adult wild June suckers left.

Since 1994, more than 7,000 hatchery-raised June suckers have been released into Utah Lake, but few or no adult offspring have survived, Keleher said. In 1994, the federal government named the June sucker an endangered species, allowing its habitat to be protected by law.

Soon thereafter, nine water-user groups with interest in Deer Creek Reservoir formed a 40-year, $40 million plan to save the fish, called the June Sucker Recovery Implementation Program.

For the past 10 years, officials of the program have purchased the rights to 21,000 acre-feet of water -- equating 6.8 billion gallons. The water is released from Deer Creek and Jordanelle to simulate the way a nondammed river would spike in water flow following the annual spring runoff, Keleher said.

Some of the "June sucker" water is now being used to keep Provo River's water level artificially high to provide a "nursery flow" that will allow the spawn to hatch and get to the lake, he said. At the peak of the release in 2002, more than 800 cubic feet per second flowed from Deer Creek and Jordanelle into Provo River. Last year only 75 cubic feet per second were used, and those low flows will be maintained again this year in order to save water for a larger flow -- more than 700 cubic feet per second -- next year. Larger flows are needed at least every three years in order to turn and clean gravel in the river, which is necessary for healthy spawning habitat.

"We recognize there is a drought, and we take shortages along with the other water users," Keleher said. "We are just going to be looking to supply enough water in the lower Provo River to maintain water quality and make sure we don't have any fish dying."

The recovery program is showing some early signs of success, he said.

"One the of biggest signs of success is that the fish we have stocked from the hatchery have been returning to the spawning run and we do have a success spawning in the river," he said. "But then we have a sort of short circuit, and once the larval fish drift down the river, they disappear. Our belief is that they get eaten by predatory nonnative fish or the habitat is not suitable for them to survive."

Recovery program officials are working on plans to control carp in the lake and restore some habitat areas in order to help the young June suckers survive, Keleher said.


[i]Caleb Warnock can be reached at 344-2543.
[/i]This story appeared in The Daily Herald on page A1.
[signature]
Reply
#2
I am not a person that likes to see any species become extinct or die off but I have a hard time seeing that much money being thrown towards some fish when there are so many other more important needs. How many people are going hungry and dying because they don't have enough money? How many dirt bags are on the street because the jails don't have enough money to hold them? How many good people could benefit from just a small portion of the money being used for the June sucker?

I am trying not to sound too negative because it is over all a good cause. I just think there are a lot more places they could put their money that would get a lot better results and would have bigger rewards.
[signature]
Reply
#3
I have given up on humanity years ago, I would rather see the money spent on fixing the enviroment that we messed up.
[signature]
Reply
#4
Hey fishluvr to a certain degree I agree with you. There are millions of worthy causes that could use the money more than the June Suckers, an endangered fish that hardly seems worth it. Although on the other hand, this will also benefit the sportfish in Utah Lake, and allow for more water to fill Utah Lake. On the downside, it means less water for Deer Creek and/or Jordanelle. It seems that there just isn't enough to go around. I'd love to see some habitat improvement/restoration done on Utah Lake, and to keep the water flowing in the Provo.

I think there are far more ridiculous things that the government spends our tax dollars on that could be diverted to better causes like prisons and welfare. Thanks for sharing your opinion.
[signature]
Reply
#5
I agree it sucks to have anything go exctinct but that much money on a sucker???? I agree the money could probably go to a better cause. But again im not an expert on the matter.
[signature]
Reply
#6
WELL I KNOW ONE PLACE THEY COULD GET MORE MONEY FROM. LEGACY HIGHWAY FIGHTING FOR THE RIGHTS OF A PRIVATE HIGHWAY? OR ALL THAT MONEY THEY SPENT FIGHTING GAY CLUBS. BUT I DO AGREE UTAH SCHOOLS SURE COULD USE THAT MONEY. BUT FEDRAL LAWS SAYS WE HAVE TO SAVE ENDANGERED SPECIES AND I DO AGREE WITH THAT ALSO. THIS IS CATCH 22.

SAVE THE SUCKERS WHO KNOWS THEY MAY HAVE THE CURE FOR STUPID GOVERMENT IDEAS AS PART OF THERE DNA.

THE OTHER POINT IS WE ARE SURPOSE TO RESPECT ALL OF GODS CREATURES. EVEN POLATIONS. SO SAVE THE GOVERMENT TOO...

[crazy]
[signature]
Reply
#7
What do you mean by far more ridiculous thing the government wastes money on?? I can't think of anything they waste money on that I would complain about so why are you complaining.

For those of you that can't feel the sarcasm in that question you need to get your feelers checked because it was ripe with sarcasm.
[signature]
Reply
#8
Did I read that they were spending 300 million for bull trout protection? I love trout fishing but 300 millionbucks? Where are our priorities? Chicken.
[signature]
Reply
#9
[Wink][Tongue][cool][angelic][crazy][shocked][laugh][unimpressed][sly]You're right fishluvr! I can't believe I even made a statement like that!!!! Come to think of it, our legislators, congressmen and women, governors, etc. etc. are doing such a great job at spending our money they all oughtta get a big fat raise while we're at it! [Tongue] You know none of us would mind chipping in a bit more taxes to help them out! [crazy]lol
[signature]
Reply
#10
This may be considered ignorant, but I don't give a crap about the June Sucker or Sculpin that live in Utah Lake. Extinction has been a process that has always happened on this Earth and yes, the encironment and species of fish in Utah Lake has changed over the last 200 years. It is how it is now, and there's nothing we can do to change that. The fact is, 3 dominant predators now live in Utah Lake (LM Bass, Walleye, Catfish) and the other fish that live in there (White Bass, Perch, Carp) will all eat the fry of small fish and adult June Suckers. It's really kind of a waste of resouces trying to save this fish when we cannot control what happens out in the lake on a day to day basis. The money could be used in better fashion to improve other aspects of our state or the environment. I'd bet that in 20 years from now, despite their efforts, the suckers will be gone.


I understand the importance of conservation of species and that one species isn't more important than another. However, it just doesn't seem like a whole lot can be done unless the sucker is introduced in to another system where they won't have the incredible pressure put on them from these very predatory species. It just seems like a battle that, despite a continued fight, we won't be able to win.
[signature]
Reply
#11
You might be right, and I must admit I have had that attitude in the past. Now, I'm not really sure where I stand on it really. I like the fact that any habitat improvements they do for the June Sucker will also aid the other species that I like to fish for, and also the fact that it helps the water level get higher.

It does seem like a lot of money to throw away on a fish that may very well be doomed anyways, no matter what we do. However, we don't know that we can't change and improve things and help this species make a comeback. Besides, I really think that if it were up to the state, they wouldn't even have a June Sucker Management Plan. The state used to take the eggs from the spawning walleye in Utah Lake and raise them in hatcheries, then release them back into the lake when they were a few inches long to help their survival rate, but now they are barred by the Federal Govt. from doing that. The walleye numbers in Utah Lake used to be much higher. I wish they could still do that now.

I think I remember hearing one time also, that there would be "punishment" of some kind from the federal government if the June Sucker were allowed to go extinct (in the form of withholding some federal funds that currently are given to the state). I'm not 100% sure on that one. Maybe PBH knows for sure.
[signature]
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)